Balta1701

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 06:52 PM) Slightly OT, but what hat does Tommy John wear in the hall of fame if he makes it? Or does he go the Gaylord Perry route? Cleveland Indians (1963-1964) Chicago White Sox (1965-1971) Los Angeles Dodgers (1972-1974, 1976-1978) New York Yankees (1979-1982, 1986-1989) California Angels (1982-1985) Oakland Athletics (1985) I think he should wear like, scrubs, or whatever you put a patient in when they go in for surgery. Because 99% of the references to him any more have to do with replacing parts of people's elbows.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 06:50 PM) http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idU...ndChannel=10000 This poll is essentially a statistician's worst nightmare. The methodology is horrible. It's literally like one of those polls on the side of CNN.com. It's a non-randomized sample of self-volunteering respondents taken online. Gallup put out a similar poll yesterday, a phone poll with an actual sample that had some attempt to be randomized, and it showed the exact opposite results. But yet...despite one using garbage methodology and one using traditional methodology, the one that used the garbage methodology got all the press coverage, because it fits into the new narrative of Clinton struggling, and the other one got little press coverage because it showed the same thing that all the other polls have shown.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 06:47 PM) McGwire "hasn't been proven" as a steroid user -- well, what is the proof people speak of? Canseco's testimony, an FBI investigation that netted his supplier/trainer, your own eyes? And yeah, his numbers besides HRs are far from HOF-worthy. And his use of the 5th amendment.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 05:18 PM) Don't forget the Sox would be dealing with Billy Beane here. He would want prospects that are CLOSE to the majors. Just like Haren was when they got him. So, it would have to be something a little closer. Gio, yes. And then.....who? Are you totally certain about that? I mean, think about the trades of Hudson and Mulder. In each of those deals, they got pretty much 1 guy that they could plug in right away (Calero and Juan Cruz) but otherwise, they took guys who were a couple years off (Barton). Esp. if Beane decides he's blowing up and going into full firesale mode, which is what trading Haren would signify, then he's smart enough to know that he has probably 2 or 3 years of down time that he's going to need to stockpile drafted guys before he can make another run. He could well be looking at guys who are 2 years away as the ideal timeline.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 05:01 PM) Everyone can't wait to unload Contreras and are doing cartwheels about Vazquez's extension. It might shock everyone that in August and September 2007 combined, Vazquez had a 3.94 ERA. Not bad. Contreras, 3.72. It really is hard to justify moving Contreras right now, at least to my eyes, esp. now that Garland has been moved, unless we're obviously upgrading that slot. The best justification for wanting to do so is simply thinking that Jose is finished; that the early part of last year wasn't just an outlier and he will never return to any sort of form. THat's a belief I understand, even if I'm hoping it isn't true. Let's put it this way; as currently constructed, the 2008 White sox will go wherever Contreras, Danks, and Floyd can take them.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 04:02 PM) I think Igawa can still be sucessful though, but he needs to get out of New York and onto a team such as the Padres. So, if we put a pitcher in the most pitcher friendly park in baseball, he might start having success. That's not a very high standard.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 03:25 PM) We'd have to dump Contreras on someone and then sign him. If we could do that without paying any of Jose's deal, then I'd certainly look into it, because the salaries could almost be a wash, and you would probably be more likely of getting more production from Kuroda over the 3 seasons. Isn't that pretty much what the Yankees thought about Kei Igawa and his contract last offseason?

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 03:17 PM) What exactly was this last injury? ESPN.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 11:45 AM) I've LONG said that there is going to be a (three or four days before) Christmas surprise pulled out on Obama... You don't pull that kind of stuff at Christmas. You do it within the next 2 weeks. People stop paying attention to the news somewhere between the 20th and 24th in a lot of families, because either you're traveling, you're getting time off work, you're stuck at a line in an airport, the kids are home from school so you're dealing with them, and so on. There's like a 1.5 week period where people just don't follow the news that closely (Heck, think about the reaction of this country to the tsunami, took us like 3 days to really start realizing how bad it was)...which is going to be an interesting variable with Iowa at January 3rd. It's possible that whatever we see in the polling data on Dec. 20th might be the last thing that matters in the race for that reason.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 11:01 AM) I would be 100% in favor of going after him except for the fact that the Cubs would simply never deal him to us. The potential PR risks would be too great for them to do so. If they do trade him, I would think he'd end up in the American League somewhere, but not with us. I think some place like Texas or maybe Seattle, maybe even Toronto or Baltimore, someone who needs a starting pitcher, can afford to spend a little more money, and who if nothing else would be happy just to get the picks if he turned his career around and then walked might do it. I'd say though that we seem like we have enough reclamation projects in our rotation with Contreras and Floyd there right now. Adding in Prior instead of Danks or Floyd just leaves us right where we were, except with more salary.

Honestly no. For 2 reasons. 1...I have no urge to give up any sort of talent for a pitcher who I don't think will ever throw more than 50 innings in a season again, and 2., I have even less of an urge to give Mark Prior $3 million than I do to trade Dubee or one of those other class A guys for him. Let someone else give up something useful for him. If the Cubs offer Prior for Contreras straight up I might take it as a salary dump, but that's it.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 10:28 AM) It is starting to sound like these were taken out of context... In other words, he went off message in an interview, and the next time the issue came up his campaign made sure to get the soundbite right, because he can't sound like he's endorsing quotas. Don't see how that's surprising at all, as far as I can tell every campaign takes that pattern with most things that you could classify as slip-ups.

I can't see why any team would want to pay him $3 million.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 06:52 AM) Here is a thought for the day... If Clinton continues to slip in the polls in IA and/or NH through December, with Obama leading or matching her, I can virtually guarantee she'll pull a nuke out of her back pocket. She's got something big on Obama saved up, I guarantee it. It may or may not even be true, or relevant, but its there. And if she sees a loss coming, she'll use it. So... what might she have, do we think? You've seen/read "Disclosure"? Replace Demi Moore's character with Hillary Clinton and Michael Douglas's character with Barack Obama.

QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 05:44 AM) I run more miles per week than I drive and I do not own lawn to cut. In all seriousness, any Presidential candidate to make the statement, "U.S. will be independent of foreign oil in 10 yrs." or similar commands my respect. Here's the shocker of the year for you...all that running? At least according to one study, it might well wind up increasing your demand for oil, because it takes an awful lot of oil to produce and ship the food that is consumed in this country.

QUOTE(Markbilliards @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 08:45 AM) Toby Hall will be better next year. He can't be worse. I think that there are quite a few people who would disagree. Gustavo Molina, for example.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 27, 2007 -> 08:54 AM) Our 40 man is full, the longer we delay the official announcement the better. Maybe we can move someone from the 40 during the GM meetings. The Rule 5 draft is in what, 2 weeks? That's the day that we need to have it full on. If we could "Have" Linebrink but also not have him at the same time by not finalizing the deal, that could basically give us a loophole.

Mike Hampton injured.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Nov 26, 2007 -> 08:35 PM) I just watched the end, so I didn't see much, but John Beck did look good on play action...the Dolphins receivers just seem pretty bad right now. The only one who has a chance to be a play maker is Ginn, and he's raw as hell. Ronnie Brown obviously is/was good, but who knows how he'll be next year when he comes back There's a bit of talent there, but that top 3 pick (in all likelyhood anyways) will be really nice for them...hell, the #1 pick would be outstanding. At this point, how much competition do they actually have for the #1?

QUOTE(BearSox @ Nov 26, 2007 -> 08:27 PM) If Kenny wants to deal with the Angels again, I wouldn't mind Gary Matthews Jr. if the Angels once again, threw in some cash. Something with Crede and prospect(s)?... But then again that is dependent on if Matthews Jr. would waive his no trade clause to Chicago. For God's sake, no one who's going to wind up in the Mitchell report please.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Nov 26, 2007 -> 08:07 PM) You dont think RB needed to be addressed in the offseason before the injury? In the higher levels of the draft? No. First, the Bears have much bigger needs on the O-Line, at WR, possibly/probably at QB, and potentially at Safety. They should have some cap room next year depending on what they do with Briggs et al., but there's really nothing the Bears can do as far as I can tell right now at RB. Their cap status and Benson's contract really leave them no choice but to try to go with these 3 guys next year, and hope that if they fix the O-Line and the rest of the offense, that fixes it. It certainly is worth noting though that there's quite a few guys out there putting up big numbers who weren't high draft picks at all, like the guys in Green Bay, Pittsburgh, etc. According to Peter King, out of the top 50 RB's in the NFL this season, 30 of them did not come out of the first round. The needs on the O Line are just bigger, and this draft is supposedly quite solid on O-Linemen

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 26, 2007 -> 08:19 PM) But I do agree that we have a lot of needs to fill, and we can't trade our 4 best prospects (DLS, Gio, Carter and Egbert) in a deal for Miggy. The dependable middle infielder is hopefully not Uribe, who should be traded ASAP for a prospect, as 4.5M is too much for an utility infielder IMHO. Do the Angels really need a 3rd baseman as well? It's really hard for me to see how the Angels need a 3rd baseman, because right now they have no where else to play Figgins. They have their 5 OF's, then they have a line of guys at SS including Izturis, Aybar, and possibly Wood if they bring him up, they have Kendrick at 2nd base, and Kotchman/Morales at 1b. Heck, they even have another 3rd baseman coming off of Back Surgery in McPherson if they're really desperate. They could still go crazy though and think that they still need more of a power bat despite having added Hunter, and honestly, I wouldn't put it past them. I can't figure out how that team will get down to 25 players, personally.

For those who didn't know it was out there, there exists on these internets something called the "Conservapedia"...essentially a purely conservative thought version of Wikipedia. Things like throwing together all the doubt it can on Global warming, etc. This has floated around for a few days...but the statistics page of that website is certainly, um, interesting.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 26, 2007 -> 06:58 PM) I realize this quote is supposed to make me think Romney is anti-Muslim, but... I don't think that's the most interesting aspect of that quote. Anyone want to guess what it is? Hint: He's a Republican? Actually, I interpreted it as saying Mitt Romney is pro affirmative action, given that he's just endorsed a quota system, and that's why I posted it.

Mitt Romney: